DARRELL BAKER, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Darrell Baker appealed the denial of his habeas corpus petition challenging his 1996 armed robbery conviction on the ground that the indictment failed to allege an essential element of the crime. The court affirmed the denial and imposed sanctions prohibiting Baker from filing further pro se pleadings challenging his conviction without counsel.
The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, holding that Baker's claim was repetitive and had been previously rejected in three prior appeals, and that Baker's continued pro se challenges constituted an abuse of the legal process.
[1] A petition for writ of habeas corpus is properly denied when it raises an issue that has been rejected in three prior appeals filed by the same petitioner.
[2] Repetitive legal challenges to a conviction that have been consistently rejected constitute an abuse of the legal process.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Baker's repetitive attacks on his conviction are an abuse of the legal process that has had and will have an adverse effect upon this court's limited resources if the attacks are allowed to continue.”
The court's reasoning for imposing sanctions against future pro se filings
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBaker was convicted in 1996 of armed robbery, aggravated assault, and armed kidnapping. His direct appeal was affirmed in 1997. In 2006, Baker filed a…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Abuse Of Legal Process cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Darrell Baker appeals an order of the circuit court denying his petition for writ of habeas corpus, which we affirm. Baker was convicted in 1996 of armed robbery, aggravated assault, and armed kidnapping. This court affirmed his direct appeal, and mandate issued December 9, 1997. Baker filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus on March 9, 2006, alleging that in Count 13 of the information, the state failed to allege an essential element of armed robbery, because it charged him with taking money or other property from the victim by force, violence, assault, or putting in fear, but it failed to allege that he possessed the intent to either permanently or temporarily deprive the victim of such money or property. The trial court held a hearing and denied the petition.
This court has rejected the identical issue now before it in three prior appeals filed by Baker. In case 1D03-241, we affirmed an order denying his September 2002 petition for writ of habeas corpus in which he raised this issue. Baker v. State, 861 So. 2d 25 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003). In case 1D04-3316, we affirmed Baker’s appeal of an order summarily denying both a 3.850 motion filed December 12, 2003, and a petition for writ of habeas corpus filed December 10, 2003, each raising the same issue. Baker v. State, 888 So. 2d 21 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004). Finally, in case 05-347, we denied on the merits an original petition for writ of habeas corpus filed January 16, 2005, raising the issue. Baker v. State, 898 So. 2d 939 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005).
In response to our order directing Baker to show cause, pursuant to State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47 (Fla.1999), why he should not be barred from further challenging his conviction unless he were represented by counsel, Baker filed a motion seeking to voluntarily dismiss his appeal, and a request asking us not to prohibit him from filing any “future non-successive issue[s] with merit.”
We conclude from our review that Baker’s repetitive attacks on his conviction are an abuse of the legal process that has had and will have an adverse effect upon this court’s limited resources if the attacks are allowed to continue. Accordingly, we prohibit Baker from filing any further pro se pleadings in this court challenging his conviction in Duval County Circuit Court Case Number 16-1995-CF-1818, regardless of the remedy sought or theory raised, unless he is represented in such proceeding by a member in.good standing of The Florida Bar. We further direct the clerk of this court not to accept any additional pro se filings in this case from Baker. AFFIRMED.
ERVIN, WEBSTER, and HAWKES, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Brown v. State, 10 So. 3d 1197 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)…and have concluded that appellant’s repetitive attacks on his conviction and sentence have indeed amounted to an abuse of the legal process “and will have an adverse effect upon this Court’s limited resources” if allowed to continue. Baker v. State, 939 So. 2d 167, 168 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006); accord Birge v. State, 620 So. 2d 234 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). Thus, we grant the state’s motion in part, and prohibit appellant from filing any further pleadings in this Court challenging his conviction in Duval County Circuit…
-
Percival Charles Ferris, Jr. v. State, 100 So. 3d 142 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)…o. 3d 669 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (five cases); Neal v. State, 65 So. 3d 66 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011) (six cases); Cash v. State, 50 So. 3d 792 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (nine cases); Obojes v. State, 946 So. 2d 602 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006) (five cases); Baker v. State, 939 So. 2d 167 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006) (four cases). However, this court has also tolerated more cases than Appellant has filed before prohibiting further pro se filings. See, e.g., Thames v. State, 93 So. 3d 1190, 2012 WL 3194117 (Fla. 1st DCA Aug.8, 2012) (at least…
-
Fails v. State, 46 So. 3d 1032 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)…challenging his conviction in Escambia County Circuit Court case number 2004-CF-3337-A, “regardless of the remedy sought or theory raised, unless he is represented in such proceeding by a member in good standing of The Florida Bar.” Baker v. State, 939 So. 2d 167, 168 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006). We further direct the clerk of this court not to accept any additional pro se filings in this case from petitioner. PETITION DISMISSED. WOLF, ROBERTS, and ROWE, JJ„ concur.…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1999)